Source: Public account [Blood Diamond Story]
Author: Left page
Tips: This article is about 10,000 words in total, and it is expected to take 24 minutes to read
Seeing the end, there will be a harvest
——Blood Diamond Story Editorial Department
Who is Ginsburg?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, born in 1933 and hospitalized in July 2020 for a malpractice and died September 18, is the second female Supreme Court justice in U.S. history.
She was nominated by Clinton in 1993, a frequent "golden sentence", a national idol justice, partial liberal, strong support for women's right to abortion, between 1970 and 1980, she participated in more than 300 sex discrimination cases, 6 of which hit the Supreme Court, and won 5 of them, successfully expanding the scope of application of the fourteen amendments to the Constitution, from the prohibition of racial discrimination to the prohibition of sex discrimination.
In 2005, Ginsburg frequently expressed his dissenting opinions in the form of "dissenting books" in court. She publicly declared a left-leaning view with the majority justices' verdict, and was dubbed a "warrior" by people, including Trump.
But Ginsburg's own personality is actually not so hot, relatively calm, and even a little reticent and shy. She has been advocating for women's rights all her life, but she is by no means a radical feminist. She never cared about whether others called her "lady" or "lady".
She fights for equal rights and not privilege for women, so she says: "I just want to take a man's foot off a woman's shoulder."
In fact, in addition to fighting for women's rights, she also fights for men's rights.
Her involvement in the Stephen Wiesenfeld case in 1975 is a case in point. A pregnant woman died of an amniotic fluid embolism after giving birth to a child, and her husband Stephen raised her alone. He wanted to apply for a social security payment for a single-parent family, but was told that the "Mother's Security Fund" could not be applied for by men.
Ginsburg felt that this was sexism, and through some effort, helped the man get subsidies, and also repealed the law.
So to be precise, Ginsburg is a gender equalizer. As she herself put it: "Women and men can only be liberated at the same time." However, in her active years, women's rights and interests were mostly damaged, and she became a "feminist".
Liberal judges like Ginsburg were in the mainstream in the 1960s and 1970s, when the affirmative action movement was in full swing, but by 1993, when Clinton nominated her as justice, the atmosphere in the United States had already shifted.
For the next two decades, the Supreme Court remained conservative in the majority, making her look different and lonely.
In the Trump era, the conservative atmosphere in the United States has reached its peak, and she is even more incompatible with the trend of the times. Coupled with the old age, so it is often asked, when to retire?
She despised Trump, broke the SPC tradition of not interfering in politics, and directly called him a "liar."
Her straightforward personality, combined with advanced fitness at an advanced age and hosting same-sex marriage, has made her often appear on the social media hot search list. Before her death, she was a popular icon, incarnating emojis and cartoon symbols, printed on mugs and T-shirts, tattooed on young people's bodies.
Actor Pete Davidson blessed Ginsburg and seized the time to get a tattoo
She earned her a rock'n' roll network nickname: "The Infamous RBG.". (Imitating the nickname "Mr. Notorious B.I.G." by black rapper Christopher Wallace)
Brooklyn's school bully
Born in Brooklyn, a poor district of New York, Ginsburg's father was a fur trader, a first-generation immigrant from Odessa, Ukraine, and a second-generation mother.
Neither of her parents had a college education, but taught her to fight for her ideals and told her how important it was to learn and educate.
As a child, Ginsburg, like a boy, jumped from one roof to another, never participating in the gossip and small talk of the girls.
At the age of 17, the day before the high school graduation ceremony, her mother died of cancer. Ginsburg said her mother taught her two "lessons": to be a lady and to remain independent.
The former means not to let senseless negative emotions take over the mind; the latter means that it is of course good to meet Prince Charming to spend a lifetime together, but there is no and must learn to live independently.
She was admitted to Cornell University and met her future husband, Martin Ginsburg. In 1954, the two married.
Martin was of great help to Ginsburg's career.
In the 1950s, there were very few women going to college, and Cornell counted as a more open school, and the ratio of boys to girls could only reach 4:1.
Some people joked: If you have a daughter, it is best to send to Cornell to study, if she can't find a relationship there, then there is no hope.
There were many guys dating Ginsburg, but Martin was the first boy to like her cute looks while admiring her knowledge.
Martin is outgoing, social, good at cooking, full of humor, XiaoJin is the opposite, quiet, shy, and rarely communicates with people.
Years later, Martin went to New York to work as a tax lawyer and did a very good job and was a little famous. But as Ginsburg's cause of gender equality became more and more outstanding, Martin voluntarily resigned and returned to Washington to take charge of "logistics" and fully support his wife.
In 1993, to help his wife compete for Supreme Court justice, Martin made a long list of tireless visits. As the "man behind successful women", very competent.
The Ginsburgs
But in the years just after graduation, among the two couples, Ginsburg was more difficult.
At that time, Martin went to the army, during which Time, Xiaojin took the child to study. After her husband retired from the military, the couple was both admitted to Harvard Law School.
Overcoming gender discrimination and family burdens, Xiaojin was successfully elected as the editor of the Harvard Law Review (Obama was the editor-in-chief) with excellent results. It is not easy to be this law editor, 530-540 law students, ranking in the top 25 to have a chance.
You know, it wasn't until the early 1950s that harvard law school was attended by women, and girls accounted for only 2% of them. When Xiaojin enrolled, there were only 9 girls among the more than 500 classmates. Women are not allowed to enter the library to consult materials, even the dean of the law school unconsciously exudes machismo, and at one party, he asked the female students present: How to explain that you occupy a degree that should belong to men?
During this time, Martin developed testicular cancer, and Ginsburg took care of her husband and young daughter while transferring to Columbia Law School for further study.
At the new school, Xiao Jin, who was overwhelmed by life, was able to continue to work as a law review editor, graduating in 1959 with the first grade in the class.
Properly a female school bully. Hegemony to the point of no heavenly reason.
But at the end of the 1950s, after graduating and looking for a job, such a good woman, no law firm was willing to hire. Even if she moved out of the Harvard Law Review's editorial resume, no one would accept it simply because she was a woman.
A Professor at Columbia University who admired him had to force Federal Law Judge Edward Palmyrie to hire her, he had to say harshly, "If you don't give Ginsburg a chance, I won't recommend any Columbia graduates to you again."
Later, he managed to find a job and was dismissed because he was pregnant.
All kinds of strange encounters have made Ginsburg make a grand wish: to fight for gender equality all his life.
Fight sexism
U.S. Supreme Court justices have so far seen only four women: O'Connor, Ginsburg, Sotomeyer and Kagan (the latter two, both nominated by Obama).
The Supreme Court of the United States, along with Congress and the President, constitutes the three powers of the United States Federation. The Supreme Court may interpret the Constitution and, accordingly, overturn the decrees of the President and Congress. The Supreme Court has only 9 justices, consisting of 1 U.S. justice and 8 U.S. Supreme Court justices, nominated by the President and confirmed by a vote of Congress. Once confirmed, those of good character are generally for life, and no institution or individual can be replaced at will, unless the Justice himself proposes to retire or is impeached by Congress.
But it was such a future justice who could not even find a job at the beginning of graduation.
After much hardship, in 1963, Ginsburg finally found a teaching position at Rutgers University to engage in academic research. She taught a course called "Gender and Law." Because of his excellent work, in 1969, he was awarded a tenured teaching position at the school.
Since then, she has been dealing with cases of discrimination against women, hoping to promote changes in national laws through individual cases.
In the 1960s, when Ginsburg first came out to work, American laws were full of all kinds of discriminatory provisions against women.
For example, the husband is the head of the family, the male owner decides the home address, most state laws in 1973 even allow employers to dismiss women on the grounds of pregnancy, women need to sign the husband to apply for credit, and twelve states stipulate that husbands cannot be prosecuted for raping their wives.
The 1960s and 1970s were the golden age of American liberals. In terms of the rule of law, the High Court, where Earl Warren is chief justice, is also a pioneer in the liberal ethos. But there is one area where the exception is women's rights, and the Warren court is not "free."
For example, 1961 Florida legislation states that participation in jury trials is a male obligation only and does not include female citizens. According to the Supreme Court justices, this is "caring" for women because "women are the center of family life".
But Ginsburg doesn't think so, thinking it's discriminatory against women, treating them differently.
In the 1971 Reed case, she wrote a brilliant defense for the same thing: "Laws that prevent women from participating fully in politics, business, and the economy are often portrayed as 'protecting women' or thinking about women... Women seem to be carefully cared for on a high platform, but when they look closely, they are locked in a cage disguised as a high platform. ”
Male justices who discriminate against women are not aware of discrimination, but on the contrary, they believe in "protecting women". This adds invisible difficulty to overturn such laws.
In fact, until he became a justice, Ginsburg often disagreed with some male colleagues who played "good men".
In the end, what Ginsburg has to fight all his life is not only the legal provisions that maliciously discriminate against women, but also more often fight against unconscious sexism.
Case by case
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that "no state can deny that everyone has the right to equal protection of the law."
This amendment advocates equality for all, but in fact mainly targets racial discrimination.
The only thing Ginsburg did before becoming a justice was to keep telling the nine male justices on the Supreme Court that the amendment applies not only racial discrimination, but also sexism.
How can a weak woman who is difficult to find even for a job wake up the male Supreme Court to pay attention to sexism?
The method Ginsburg chose was to fight one lawsuit after another, starting from the most typical case, perseverance, promoting qualitative change with quantitative change, and slowly tearing down the stubborn edifice of sexism. That is what Zeng Guofan said about stupid kung fu: "Stiffen the village and fight a stupid battle." ”
The cases she chooses may not be major, but they are sufficiently representative. The first case she handled on appeal to the High Court was in the 1967 case of Sally Reid.
Sally is a single mother living in Idaho and her teenage son Skip is disabled. On March 29, 1967, Skip went to visit his father, Heather, and shot himself.
Sally, in pain, could not understand why her son had committed suicide. When Former Fusisl rushed to apply for insurance payments for her son, she began to be suspicious.
Sally's application should be made by herself, not By Sear, as the administrator of her son's insurance benefits. But an Idaho court rejected her application on the grounds that state law had long stipulated that "men take precedence over women" in such disputes.
The case hit the Supreme Court. Ginsburg volunteered to write a summary of the case.
In her abstract, she writes: "Women have full citizenship and are entitled to the legally guaranteed right to life and liberty, as well as equal legal protection."
In the end, all Supreme Court judges unanimously ruled that Idaho law violated Article 14 of the Constitution.
Since that case, the Supreme Court has finally acknowledged that sexism is as unconstitutional as racial discrimination. This case also completely reversed the Supreme Court's arrogant attitude of ignoring sexism.
Sally's case was just the beginning, after which Ginsburg dealt with a series of government regulations suspected of sexism. Take, for example, the Wiesenfeld case we mentioned earlier.
After accumulating enough such cases, in the 1980s, Ginsburg had a bold idea to package up the previously handled cases of sexism and pass the Equal Rights Amendment. Unfortunately, this amendment was not adopted in the same way as the anti-racial discrimination amendment.
But despite the lack of this "final blow," her years of efforts have actually made legislators and society as a whole aware that no sexist laws can be enacted anymore.
In this passionate years of struggle, her personal status has also developed by leaps and bounds.
In 1972, she became the first woman to receive tenure at Columbia Law School. That same year, she became the first director of the ACLU's Women's Rights Project.
In 1980, she was appointed by President Jimmy Carter to serve as a judge of the District of Columbia Circuit, a 13-year assignment.
Abortion Bill
In 1970, when the wind of american freedom was in full swing, two young feminist female lawyers, Waddington and Kofi, were on a whim and ready to challenge anti-abortion regulations in Dallas, Texas.
They carefully sought out a pregnant woman who wanted to have an abortion as the plaintiff. The pregnant woman, named McConnway, was 21 years old, unmarried, unplanned, and in a difficult situation, with no money to go to a state where abortion was legalized.
In March of that year, McConnway, alias Roy, sued Dallas City Attorney Wade, accusing Texas' anti-abortion laws of unconstitutionality. The case was tried for several years, and after many twists and turns, it was finally appealed to the Supreme Court.
On 22 January 1973, nine Supreme Court justices, by 7 votes to 2, passed a ruling legalizing abortion: women are constitutionally protected and have the right to decide whether or not to become mothers. The provisions of this judgment are quoted in the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution to protect women's privacy.
The case marked the beginning of the abortion legalization movement, but the verdict also unlocked a decades-long left-right battle. The intensity and longevity of the controversy, which is extremely rare in the legal and political history of the United States, has not ceased to this day.
From the moment the verdict came into effect, conservatives continued to call for its overturning and a total ban on abortion. Whether or not to agree with the legalization of abortion has become one of the core issues in the left-right camp dispute, and it is also a measure of whether a person's freedom or conservatism is measured.
In recent years, with the rise of conservative religious forces, the anti-abortion campaign has become louder.
Especially after Trump took office, the "Pro-life" anti-abortion camp gained momentum, and Alabama and Louisiana passed the ban on female abortion bills, and did not eliminate special cases such as rape and incest leading to pregnancy.
Since 2019, 15 states in the United States have proposed the Heartbeat Act, which stipulates that if the pregnancy exceeds 6 weeks and the fetus is determined to have a "heartbeat", the mother must be prohibited from having an abortion. A pregnant woman who is found to have had an abortion within 6 weeks of pregnancy can be considered second-degree murder with a maximum sentence of 30 years.
The problem is that during the 6 weeks of pregnancy, many women simply cannot determine whether they are pregnant or not, and may miss the abortion period. But conservatives ignore that, including Alabama, and six states, including Alabama, Georgia, Ohio, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi and North Dako, have passed tough anti-abortion laws.
Ginsburg is unwavering in its support for women's right to self-abortion.
But as a prudent judge, she did not fully agree with the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. In her view, it is right to agree that women have abortion, but too generalized and non-targeted judgments are easy to attract organized resistance from conservatives, which is not conducive to the step-by-step promotion of women's abortion rights.
It is this prudence that makes her opinion more professional and convincing.
When she was nominated as a Supreme Court judge in 1993, a reporter asked her how she viewed her right to abortion, and her answer was clear and forceful: "Whether or not to have children is an important decision in a woman's life, about her well-being and self-esteem, and she must decide on her own." When the government takes away the choice of this decision, women are not considered to be adults who can take responsibility for their own choices. ”
In 2013, a private company opposed the mandatory application of the Affordable Health Care Act on the grounds that it violated the Restoration of Religious Freedom Act and the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The company believes that 4 of the 20 types of contraceptive insurance provided to female employees under the law are inconsistent with religious beliefs.
To this end, Ginsburg published a 35-page "dissent", resolutely defending women's rights and interests and opposing the denial of women's right to abortion.
Her reasoning, as always, is, "This is to deprive women of equal rights." The right to abortion balances a woman's autonomous obligations throughout the life course. Balances her relationship with men, society and the state as an independent, self-reliant, and equal citizen."
From young to old, Ginsburg has always adhered to the bottom line of American liberals.
But with Ginsburg's death, conservatives are likely to have the upper hand, sensitive abortion rights issues are at risk of shifting to the right, and women's abortion rights may be banned.
The ban on women's abortion rights is trivial, and the more serious consequence is that the conservative forces on the right will become more polarized and excited as a result.
Previously, the ratio of 9 justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, liberals and conservatives, has been maintained at a 4:5 ratio. Roughly balanced. (One of the conservatives supports women's right to abortion.) If Trump nominates a conservative justice again, the Balance Between the Left and Right of the Supreme Court will be completely upset and become 3:6.
As a result, the SPC, the president, and the National Assembly are all likely to be biased toward the right.
The latest news is that Trump will nominate Amy Kony Barrett as a Supreme Court justice. Barrett, 48, is a harsh conservative. On immigration, health care, and gay rights, they are all the complete opposite of liberals. He is likely to vote to pass an anti-abortion bill.
This is the third time Trump has nominated conservative judges in his first term, which is quite rare in American history, and it is really timely.
In 2017, Trump nominated conservative Neil Gorsuch as a supreme court justice. In 2018, he nominated another conservative, Brett Kavanaugh, to the Supreme Court.
It is worth noting that trump's two nominations of justices, in the Senate vote, were barely passed, Kavanaugh confirmed the qualifications by a vote of 50:48, and Gorsuch was 55:45 votes. In stark contrast, when Ginsburg was nominated that year, the Senate vote ratio was 96:3, almost full.
Gorsuch's appointment, in particular, broke for the first time the tradition that "it takes at least 60 votes to appoint a justice to pass." Then-Senator Republican leader McConnell triggered the "nuclear process, changing the rules of procedure to approve the appointment by a simple majority.
Commenting on this move, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said, "Decades later, we will look back sadly on today and find that this is the day we changed the history of the Senate and the Supreme Court." To this day, the Democratic Party is angry about it.
It can be seen that every time Trump nominates a justice, he is mixed with fierce party struggles, and it can also be seen that the US imperialists are torn apart at this time.
Ginsburg's death will only further exacerbate the bipartisan struggle and rift.
Religion and politics
Of course, having said that, historically, it is also common for AMERICAN justices to "turn their faces and not recognize people". A conservative president nominates a conservative judge, but within a few years, or even just after taking office, the judge may change his position and become a liberal.
For example, in 1953, President Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren. Warren was considered a staunch conservative judge at the time, but it was not expected that Warren led the liberal wave of the 1960s and 1970s (except for women's rights). Afterwards, Eisenhower shouted that nominating Warren was "the stupidest mistake of his life."
Theodo Roosevelt-nominated Justice Holmes was also a little "disobedient", so much so that the elder Roosevelt once complained: "Even if I carve a judge with a banana, I have a backbone than this boy!" ”
The "defection" of judges is related to the high degree of independence of the US High Court, and it is also related to the fact that the term of office of judges is much longer than that of presidents. Once confirmed, the justice cannot be replaced at will, of course, he can not be "too obedient", and the time is easy, and it is normal for the concept to change.
Moreover, Barrett, who was nominated by Trump, may not be able to pass the Senate vote to confirm it. Currently, Republicans have a 53:47 ratio in the Senate, but two Republican lawmakers have previously publicly expressed their opposition to the election premise of a new judge. This adds uncertainty to the smooth passage of nominations.
Therefore, it is not easy to conclude whether the entire political system will really be right-wing under the influence of the US High Court and even the High Court.
In fact, the real concern is not the imbalance between the left and right of the justices, but whether the imbalance can be quickly corrected.
The United States has always been a country of left and right, and the imbalance of a moment and a half has never been a big problem, and the liberal trend of the 60s and 80s has soared, but correspondingly, conservative forces have also secretly accumulated strength. Taking the abortion bill as an example, after the rapid liberalization of the 1970s, there has been a "retro" phenomenon in the state capitals of the central and southern regions in recent years to hedge against the previous surge.
The problem is that the latest wave of right-wing reform is not simply from structural changes in the economy or from changes in the pattern of international competition, but from something more stubborn and almost unchangeable – religious beliefs and ideologies.
In October 2018, the Pew Research Center released an investigation report that the factors influencing people's support for banning abortion are not gender, nor class status, but religion and political parties.
59 percent of Republicans approve of banning abortion, and 76 percent of Democrats approve of abortion as legal. Among the dominant Protestants in the United States, 61% of white Protestant evangelicals are staunchly anti-abortionists, in contrast to 67% of mainstream white Protestants who believe abortion is legal and 74% of non-religious people agree that abortion is legal.
The United States was an extremely secular country, and the 1787 Constituent Assembly also defined the tradition of "separation of church and state." But paradoxically, the United States is also a country with a very developed religious tradition.
At present, 70.6% of the believers in the United States believe in Christianity, and Protestants account for 40% of the total population of the United States. The proportion of people who claim to be religious in the United States is far higher than that of the same advanced capitalist countries, only 46% in Canada, 37% in France, 29% in Sweden, but more than 60% in the United States.
In the tradition of "separation of church and state," American religious groups are a bit like pyramid schemes, competing with each other to introduce "faith packages" to the public to attract more private funding.
In such a brawl, white Protestants, liberal Catholics, blacks, Jews, and non-believers slowly moved into the same camp, embracing the values of liberalism, progressivism, peace, justice, and tolerance.
This camp grew mainly from the progressiveism of 1900 and the civil rights movement of 1960. They support abortion, believe in science, are democratic supporters, and belong to the left.
But as we mentioned earlier, the left's radical support for women's abortion rights, an extremely sensitive issue in religion, has greatly stimulated the rebellion and solidarity of conservative Christians.
In fact, it was the anti-patriarchal, anti-Vietnam War, anti-institutional, and liberal radical left of the civil rights movement of the 1960s that ignited a sense of crisis and enthusiasm for warmth on the ultra-conservative right.
The conservative right-wing, which is mainly entrenched in the south-central States, generally focuses on family, strictly follows the revelations of the Bible, believes in moral absolutism, patriotism, advocates the fight against atheism, deviance and crime, and of course opposes abortion.
The passion of the civil rights movement was extinguished, the conservative right began to rise, and the first to recognize and exploit this force was Republican President Ronald Reagan in 1980.
By the George W. Bush era, the conservative right had become the most important support force for the Republican Party. The conservative Christian Coalition, which distributed 70 million copies of the "Voter's Guide" across the country, openly intervened in politics and organized congregations to support the equally conservative George W. Bush.
George W. Bush has responded positively by becoming increasingly right-wing in his administration and using religious language in public speeches, such as his referencing of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as the "axis of evil."
When Trump took office, it was even more careless, and evangelical Christians "practiced" directly in the president's office. Trump himself has frequently "shown love" to this part of the religious electorate, and he has basically become a spokesman for conservative religious forces in policies such as immigration, anti-abortion and international relations.
Conservatives are not as fragmented as the liberal left, extremely stable and united.
In this new crown epidemic, Trump's approval rating has suffered a period of Waterloo, but his support rate has always been stable at 40-45%, even if there is a lag, the lag has not changed much. The reason is that Trump's "basic disk" is as stable as Tarzan. So Trump joked: If I shoot someone on Fifth Avenue, it won't affect my approval ratings.
In the face of this conservative religious force, how will the Democratic Party respond? Trouble is here. At present, the Democratic Party has no good response.
In 2004, the concept of the "religious left" emerged, but the left has historically been disunited.
Conservative religions preach fear and division and gain "vertical users"; left-wing religions preach love and peace, and unity is ineffective; conservative religions advocate following the teachings of the Bible, simple and crude, and left-wing religions exhort people to feel the pluralistic complexity of modern society, the former is obviously more in line with the lack of security and belonging of modern people.
The good news for the Democratic Party is that the number of non-believers has grown rapidly over the years, but the problem has arisen again, relative to the high desire to vote among conservatives, and the general political coldness of non-believers and their reluctance to come out to vote.
In this way, in the future, the right-wing religious forces in the United States will take the United States to where they will go, and it is really not optimistic.
Ginsburg's death added another thick haze to the already unoptimistic political climate.
The overthrow of women's abortion rights by the right of the right is a trivial matter, and the most feared thing is that the correction mechanism of political imbalance in the United States will be seriously dysfunctional because of her departure, and the entire power system will slide into the quagmire of extreme conservatism and cannot extricate itself.
Afterword
Among the three rights of the United States, the role of the Supreme Court is already a bit like a woodpecker. Based on the Constitution, it constantly picks up errors in the President's executive orders and laws enacted by Congress.
But if the Supreme Court is already biased, it is like a woodpecker picking food, because if it does not eat some kind of insect, the whole tree may be hollowed out.
In Ginsburg's later years, the strange thing is that she has been reluctant to take the initiative to retire after suffering from two cancers and deteriorating health.
If she retires during her President Ma tenure, she has every chance of maintaining the equilibrium of the Supreme Court. Because Obama is like-minded with her, both are equalizers, and he can preserve the liberal legacy by nominating a successor.
This seems to show from one side that Ginsburg has no intention of mixing with party politics. Many domestic legal experts also believe that she is just a simple judge, and has nothing to do with the left and right.
The problem is that Justice King, in her later years in the Ledbett case, did not agree with the Supreme Court's 5:4 vote and took the initiative to intervene in Congress to overturn the decision of her Supreme Court colleagues. Eventually, the Then Democratic-controlled Congress supported her idea, and the then Oba President Ma signed a new law passed by Congress.
In other words, she is very good at using the balance of power in the United States. She also knows that law and politics cannot be completely separated.
Moreover, in response to a question from New Yorker author Jeffrey Toobin about retirement, she made it clear that the retirement of every high court justice, the party to which the president belongs, is an important consideration.
But the tragedy is that such a person who knows the stakes has died in the presidency of a president who hates it the most. Sometimes I think that this may be the fate of a country. After all, no one can accurately predict when a person will die.
For China, the rightization of the United States is by no means a good thing. In the 1950s, the result of the extreme right-wing transformation of the United States was a big fight with China, and the two countries broke with each other for more than two decades. If the United States were to turn to the right again today, the results could be just as tragic.
At that time, Japan was extremely right-winged and went crazy, and the main unlucky country was its neighbor, China. If the US imperialists also move toward extreme rightism this year, most of its main bearers will be what it considers to be its main competitor - China.
However, today's China is no longer a decadent and divided country, but faces a right-wing madman with the second largest economy in the world. We are not afraid, nor do we have to hide. In the past hundred years, China has encountered more difficult things. Soldiers will come to block, water will come to cover,
In fact, looking at Ginsburg's life, I envy her life in my heart. In addition to her busy work, her family life is very healthy and happy. She raised two children, a bunch of grandchildren, and was married to her husband for 56 years until his death from cancer in 2010.
In June 2010, when doctors told her husband, Martin, that they were helpless about his condition. The model husband wrote his wife the last text message of his life, which contained many emotional sentences:
"My dearest Ruth, you are the only person I have ever loved in my life. I've admired and loved you almost since the day we first met at Cornell fifty-six years ago. How fortunate I am to be able to watch you go all the way to the highest peak in the legal world! ”
A person, a lifetime, has such a love, running such a happy family, probably more happy than any career success. Such a life, such a stable family, can only be possible in a country of continued prosperity and stability.
In fact, most ordinary Chinese, yearning for this kind of life, wives and children hot kiln head, no ambition, not greedy and not robbed, for a family health and peace of mind, even if it is flat. The so-called yearning for a better life is nothing more than that.
In the past 40 years, the country's stable development has provided countless ordinary Chinese with the conditions to create a better life. But seriously, 40 years really hasn't been enough, and a happy life has only begun.
However, in the past one or two years, the domestic security has been as stable as ever, and the international environment has been turbulent. Suddenly, globalization is regressing, trade barriers are increasing, friction is constant, the country that sees us as competitors seems to have a fever and is going crazy, and a neighboring country wants to show off its cannons and guns.
Many people say that Today China is also a bit inflated and oblivious. In fact, I don't know where the basis for this statement came from. All I know is that for Chinese who have only just begun a happy life, no one is more eager for a stable life than they are.
The tree wants to be quiet and the wind is not stopping, and that is not the fault of the tree. The jackals come with shotguns, friends come with good wine, we only defend the equal treatment between countries, and we only guard the ordinary days of wives and children.
If you're not crazy, I'm not demon, it's as simple as that.
END
Author: Left page, media writer, senior researcher of blood diamond stories.
Some references:
Roe v. Wade Wade) 丨Beijing Court Network
Starting with America's Strictest Abortion Bill: Why Does Religion Exacerbate America's Political Divisions? 丨Interface culture
How Ruth Bader Ginsburg has moved the Supreme Court丨The New Yorker
Gentle Justice 丨 Linda Hershman
Moments of Dissent 丨 Irene Carmon, Shana Kaniznik
Female Justice Ginsburg 丨 documentary
All that sees here is true love
Follow me to see more stories of international hardcore history